Caution Stoopid Newbie
Greg J. Zartman
greg at kwikfind.com
Thu Apr 5 19:15:39 GMT 2001
I'm assuming that "the problem" you are referring to is using any version of
Samba greater than V2.0.7?
I agree that downtime is not a good thing, but that doesn't mean that you
can't accept a certain amount of risk in implementing new code, hardware, or
anything else. It depends on the situation. My comment about being in a
non-critical environment referred to situation that this person currently is
in. I believe he is trying to set this thing up at home with a handful of
PCs. This is a completely different situation than if he were considering
implementing it on a corporate environment with several hundred clients.
Are both setups critical?? Apples and Oranges; Of course they aren't. If
everyone took the all systems are critical approach, the Linux/Unix
community would be light years behind where it is now.
I don't think twice about trying new technology on select users in my
office. Worse case, they can always goto the main server. This may be
considered setting up a test environment, but I consider trying out a new
"bell or whistle" on a non-critical environment. Regular users, performing
everyday activities, are much more likely to run across a problem with a new
setup than I would be working with it at home or something like that.
My two cents.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Lang" <aalang at rutgersinsurance.com>
To: "Samba News" <samba-ntdom at samba.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 6:13 AM
Subject: Re: Caution Stoopid Newbie
> Problem is though, unless it is a test environment, you should always
> your systems as critical. Bad practice if you think otherwise. Downtime
> never acceptable if you can avoid it.
> Adam Lang
> Systems Engineer
> Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Greg J. Zartman" <greg at kwikfind.com>
> To: "Samba News" <samba-ntdom at samba.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 7:20 PM
> Subject: Re: Caution Stoopid Newbie
> > Jet,
> > I think people can get all worked up about the different versions and
> > should be used by the average users. What it boils down to is this:
> > Version 2.0.7 is the current production release and is therefore
> > stable. If you are in an environment that is sensitive to stability,
> > use that version. With that said, I think that for just about anyone
> > version 2.2 alphaxx is the best solution. Especially if you are setting
> > domain that included Win2k machines. Yes, there is development going on
> > with the code, and not all of it is 100% stable. From what I've seen,
> > however, the samba team does an excellent job of keeping the code
> > I started from scratch with Linux (Mandrake 7.2) in January of this year
> > downloaded Samba from CVS right off the bat. The only problems that I
> > run into is with my own mistakes. The code has worked flawlessly. If
> > are in a non-critical environment, I wouldn't hesitate to use Samba 2.2.
> > Greg
More information about the samba-ntdom